Loading...
Loading...
This project does not aim to criticize or defend any specific historical narrative or nation. We objectively present differences in textbook and official descriptions to encourage multi-faceted understanding.
Perspectives Summary
The systematic killing of Koreans by Japanese vigilante groups, the military, and police following the Great Kanto Earthquake of September 1, 1923 — carried out under the pretext of baseless rumors — is clearly recognized in the United States as a "massacre."
In American academic circles, the incident is analyzed in the context of racism, nativism, and colonialism. At the time, U.S. diplomatic officials in Japan — including Acting Consul Frank Nile in Yokohama — witnessed and recorded the killings, sending detailed reports back to Washington. These primary sources are preserved and publicly available at the U.S. National Archives. American diplomats reported that "thousands of Koreans were killed," clearly documenting the reality of organized violence. Major U.S. media (including the New York Times and Washington Post) used the term "massacre" from the time of the events themselves, and at the 100th anniversary in 2023, coverage was largely critical of the Japanese government's refusal to officially acknowledge the killings.
While the U.S. government has issued no specific official statement, academia, media, and the Asian-American community clearly recognize the killings as a massacre. At the 100th anniversary in 2023, Korean-American and Japanese-American communities in the United States held commemorative events to raise public awareness of the historical facts. Academic interest in the incident continues to grow within East Asian studies, where it is examined as an intersection of colonialism and racial violence.
This comparison is based on general descriptions from official or widely used history textbooks in each country. While minor nuances may change in translation, the goal is to highlight differences in how major events are perceived, the order of description, and what is emphasized. In particular, notable differences in the naming of events and the background of their occurrence can be seen between "United States" and "China".